Charles Barkley, who's an Obama supporter, is making the rounds of the political talk shows. I keep seeing him making statements like this one…
Well, I think, you know, people keep saying, well, he doesn't have enough experience on national security and things like that. First of all, whoever the president is, he's going to have tons of advisers. It ain't like the president gets to make every decision on his own. You have great advisers around you.
That's all true but I think it's a lame thing to say about your guy. If Obama is the Democratic nominee — which is looking a bit more likely these days — I'll vote for him, probably with more enthusiasm than I generally have in the voting booth. But I don't buy this idea that it's not a negative for an elected official to not have experience in so vital an area since he can surround himself with people who do. Hey, I don't know how to perform an angioplasty but I could probably hire someone who does to advise me. Want to let me work on your arteries?
I thought that was a dumb argument eight years ago when Bush supporters were telling us how it was okay that he had no experience in foreign affairs…or even much knowledge about what was going on in other countries. It's still a dumb argument. Given the choice of two people, we might weigh all the pros and cons and decide that the candidate lacking in some area was still the better choice. But let's not pretend it doesn't matter.